Why Sidney Rice's Injury Isn't As Devastating As Everyone Thinks It Is
by Ted Glover on Aug 26, 2010 8:44 PM CDT
in Minnesota Vikings 2010 Season
Email
PrintWell, at least for the Vikings as a team, and not necessarily Rice the individual. I mean, it's gotta suck knowing that the best QB in the history of the game is your QB and you're going to miss half the season. I've been mulling this Sidney Rice deal for a couple of days, and I've come to one irrefutable conclusion: It doesn't matter who the wide receivers are with Brett Favre as quarterback, somebody will step up and fill the void, and the Vikings offense will still be highly productive. Let's take a look at Favre's career, examine who he's had to throw to, and then compare that to who he has to throw to this year. Once we do that, I think you'll agree with me that the passing offense will be fine.
Really, it'll be okay. But I will give you two choices. Take the blue pill, you wake up in your bed, and you believe what you want to believe. But take the red pill, stay in Wonderland, and I'll show you how deep the talented rabbit hole goes. Remember, All I offer is the truth, nothing more. After the jump, of course.
First, let's look at some receivers Brett Favre has had to throw to over his years in Green Bay and Minnesota. Let's start in Green Bay with Sterling Sharpe, Robert Brooks, and Antonio Freeman. In the early and mid 1990's Favre's two best targets were Sterling Sharpe and Robert Brooks. Sharpe was a legitimately great receiver who had his career cut short by a neck injury. Focus on Sharpe's and Brooks' stats from 1992-1994, which was Sterling's last season, and then Brooks' 95 season, and then Freeman from 1996 on:
|
Player |
Receptions |
Yards |
Avg |
TD |
|
Sharpe |
1992: 108 93: 112 94: 94 |
1461 1274 1119 |
13.5 11.4 11.9 |
13 11 18 |
|
Brooks |
93: 20 94: 58 95: 102 96: 23 97: 60 |
180 648 1497 344 1010 |
12.9 11.2 14.7 15.0 16.8 |
0 4 13 4 7 |
|
Freeman |
95: 8 96: 56 97: 81 98: 84 |
106 933 1243 1424 |
13.3 16.7 15.3 17.0 |
1 9 12 14 |
So, what does the data tell us? Well, a couple of things. First, these were some very good Green Bay teams, and the 1996 team won the Super Bowl. It also tells us that when there was an established guy that went down from an injury, another guy who was either okay or unproven the previous season stepped up and filled the void when a legitimate number one went down.
In 1994 Sterling Sharpe had another Pro Bowl year in what was setting up to be a Hall of Fame career. He had to retire because of a neck injury, and Robert Brooks, who had numbers which look a lot like Greg Camarillo, had a monster 1995.
In 1996, Robert Brooks, coming off a Sterling Sharpe year, only played in 7 games due to injury, and the previously unheralded Antonio Freeman, who had only 8 catches in 1995, filled the void with a line of 56/933/16.7/9. Freeman took over the #1 spot and Brooks became the #2 guy in 1997, and then left the Packers a year or two later.
Now, let's look at the Packers wideouts from the end of Freeman's career through 2004, and we'll add Bill Schroeder, Donald Driver, and Javon Walker, with the back half of Freeman's career:
|
Player |
Rec |
Yards |
Avg |
TD |
|
Freeman |
1999: 74 00: 62 01: 52 |
1074 912 818 |
14.5 15.5 15.7 |
6 9 6 |
|
Schroeder
|
98: 31 99: 74 00: 65 01: 53 02 (Det): 36 |
452 1051 999 918 595 |
14.6 14.2 15.4 17.3 16.5 |
1 5 4 9 5 |
|
Driver |
01: 13 02: 70 03: 52 04: 84 05: 86 |
167 1064 621 1208 1221 |
12.8 15.2 11.9 14.4 14.2 |
1 9 2 9 5 |
|
Walker |
02: 23 03: 41 04: 89 05: 4 06: 69 |
319 716 1382 27 1084 |
13.9 17.5 15.5 6.8 15.7 |
1 9 12 0 8 |
So just like the Sharpe-Brooks-Freeman triumvirate, others stepped up to fill the void when a well known, go to guy was hurt or got traded. As Freeman faded, Bill Schroeder stepped up with essentially three straight 1,000 yard seasons. He then signed with Detroit and faded into oblivion. Driver stepped in and filled the void for Schroeder, Javon Walker blossomed and then faded, and Jennings stepped up, albeit more with Aaron Rodgers than Favre, but his game was still elevated with Favre in 2006, his last year in Green Bay, with 632 yards on 45 catches.
Now, let's look at what the Vikings had in 2009, Favre's first (then last, then first again, ha ha) season with the Vikings:
|
Player |
Rec |
Yards |
Avg |
TD |
|
Bernard Berrian |
07: 71 08: 48 |
951 964 |
13.4 20.1 |
5 7 |
|
Sidney Rice |
07: 31 08: 15 |
396 141 |
12.8 9.4 |
4 4 |
|
Percy Harvin |
No |
Previous |
NFL |
Exp. |
Conventional wisdom entering last season that Bernard Berrian was the unquestioned number 1 receiver, but who would complement him? Then Berrian got injured, and everyone worried that there was no depth, talent, and ability at the WR position. Rice was a bust, Harvin was too small and fragile to play 16 games, blah, blah, blah.
Remember?
Yeah, I think the receivers seemed to figure it out last year in the absence of Berrian, who came back to have a decent year even with the multiple hamstring injuries.
So, let's look at the talent level and compare it to what Green Bay had in the mid-Aughts. First off, the I would take Harvin or Berrian over any 1,000 yard receiver the Packers put up from 2000-2006, except Donald Driver and Walker's 2004 season. Secondly, the Vikings have more proven talent on their roster (Camarillo, Greg Lewis) than the unsung guys Green Bay had before they stepped up. I mean, these guys were like Jaymar Johnson in their anonymity, and they literally came out of nowhere.
No one saw the years Donald Driver, Javon Walker, Bill Schroeder, etc., had coming until they were forced in to contributing roles, and I bet if you could get them one on one, at least one of those guys would admit they didn't see it coming, either.
The injury to Rice is a serious one, and it will affect the Vikings. Percy Harvin's migraines are a serious matter, and if they don't get them controlled, his availability could be in doubt from week to week.
But there is talent on this roster, and when you look at the history of the WR position on teams quarterbacked by Brett Favre, and then look at the ability of the players on the roster, someone will step up and come out of nowhere.
Of that I have no doubt.
90 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
really well done
but i do have something to say about Sids style of receiving. He is primarily going to go up for the ball, so that means you can toss it a little high and it’ll be ok because he has the height and the vertical to get it. Favre got that for a year, i am just concerned he got used to playing with sids style. But i may be completely wrong about this, he may develop a new report with walker or berrian and start playing to their strengths. Just an observation.
I kind of agree with you...
… and I sincerely hope you are right. But, the margin of error for getting to the Superbowl and winning it, which I think was/is our realistic goal, is very small.
What encourages me is the idea that mid season, if our record is good, say even 5-3, or 6-2, and Sid comes back, then we can get into top form going into December and January.
The other thing that worries me is the depth question. Even if we are ok with Sid out 1/2 the season, there is Percy and his migraines which you mentioned, and then what if someone else gets hurt? I hate to say it, but I would say shallow rosters and weak back ups defeat teams just as readily as having weak starters.
The Bears, for example, upgraded but are extremely shallow. Any injuries and they are done.
If another wide out goes down… well I hate to think what it might be like…
But I agree, Favre makes guys better. Camarillo will look better on the Vikings than he did on Miami. And Bernard Berrian looks finally 100%, which he never was last season.
by HammeroftheGods on Aug 26, 2010 9:52 PM CDT reply actions
Forgot about Jaymar Johnson...
… another loss at wide receiver. We have gotten pretty much decimated at wide receiver this off season.
But we got help, and maybe a few atlas orthogonal adjustments and we’ll produce a crop of superhuman wide receivers.
by HammeroftheGods on Aug 26, 2010 9:54 PM CDT reply actions
Yea...
But Jaymar never played. He has 1 reception his entire career.
Talented, yes. But not anyone I would consider as a “loss” to the team.
The only real loss is Sidney. Harvin is not injured, he just has migraines which by the way were more frequent last year during training camp and preseason as well.
Bernard Berrian
If he stays healthy, there is no reason (other than double coverage) he won’t lead our team. Percy is great and all, but I feel like he is a little overated. Yeah he gets us those great first downs, but he was an 800 yard receiver. Berrian should easily pass that.
We should be fine without Rice. Berrian stretches the field, Harvin controls the intermediate game and Shank can get those slants for TDs if Harvin is unhealthy. I do wish Chilly would at least reconsider Webb at WR, just for red zone purposes, but I understand why he won’t.
I'm telling you, folks
Don’t sleep on Greg Camarillo.
Guy has 105 catches the last two years. . .50 in ’08 before he blew out his knee, and 55 in ’09 coming back from the knee injury.
Those 105 catches in the last two seasons are
-More than the allegedly great James Jones (99 catches in THREE years)
-More than the allegedly great Jordy Nelson (55 catches in two years)
-Only three less than the allegedly great Devin Hester (108)
Camarillo would be no worse than a #3 receiver on any team in this division, and we got him for a defensive back that we were probably going to end up cutting anyway.
The more I look at this deal and the more I see of Camarillo, the more I like it.
SBNation Minnesota - For the greatest sports fans in the world.
The Daily Norseman - The greatest Vikings' site on the Internet!
by Christopher Gates on Aug 26, 2010 11:51 PM CDT reply actions
Its' not just about catches.
His YAC were not impressive. He’s not very fast. Heck when I watched that video of him getting that TD I thought the thing was in slow motion.
I agree we needed him, and that the Dolphins liked him, but there is a reason we got him so cheap.
It's a lot easier to love the Vikings when they win...
Somehow this ignores those portions of reality wherein Camarillo graduated from Stanford with an engineering degree and is smart enough to know that he has to run his route precisely past the marker, turn, and catch the ball with his great hands. None of the balls thrown to him last year that hit his hands were dropped. That’s spelled N-O-N-E.
The reason we got Greg is the Dolphins now have Brandon Marshall and an injury at cornerback, whereas the Vikings have Chris Cook as their first draft choice and injury at receiver.
There are plenty of Phins Fans who would still like Greg back and wonder aloud how a guy named “Benny” could be mean enough to play corner.
The point is, Favre is savvy enough to know how to use a guy like Greg to move the chains, which is the whole point of the WCO. Your opponents never score if you keep the football and continue to move the chains.
That's why he's the #3 guy
we don’t need him to be fast. We just need him to move chains. Which is what he does, well apparently.
Ted Glover......I knew you would come around.
I mean, it’s gotta suck knowing that the best QB in the history of the game is your QB and you’re going to miss half the season.
I will be there in person to see some REVENGE on Sept 9th,2010!
Brett Favre is the Greatest QB in NFL History, Bar None!
Brett Favre will be back in 2010, Guaranteed!
Brett Favre will lead the Vikings to a Victory in Super Bowl XLV, Guaranteed!
Kudos................................................
Brett Favre surely is the Greatest QB in NFL History, Bar None!
Brett Favre makes everyone around him that much better!
No Worries Here! All Guarantees intact!
I will be there in person to see some REVENGE on Sept 9th,2010!
Brett Favre is the Greatest QB in NFL History, Bar None!
Brett Favre will be back in 2010, Guaranteed!
Brett Favre will lead the Vikings to a Victory in Super Bowl XLV, Guaranteed!
by REVENGE4FAVRE on Aug 27, 2010 2:39 AM CDT up reply actions
I'll take Favre but
He is not the best QB in the history of the game. When you have a guy like Montana who has 4 rings, 3 SB MVPs and has never thrown an INT in the SB you can throw all Favre stats out the window.
Rice smice, Montana won his first two SBs without Jerry Rice. Then there is Elway.
Yeah Ted I bet you were saying he was the best QB of all time a season ago. Yeah right.
R4F is so drunk off purple kool aid Favre can do no wrong, even when he does.
Favre: It's rare to ever see a QB be so indecisive, waffle...
It's also unlikely to have one start 19 consecutive seasons.
by VikesPma on Aug 27, 2010 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
as a Favre homer, I will give you Montana
Elway, I am sorry is not better than Favre. Sorry, nothing you say will change my mind on that one. Elway was great, but not better than Favre. Why o why must a great quarterback be judged solely on Super Bowls? What because the experts like those at ESPN believe this is the only way to judge? That would make Marino worse than Dilfer if you go by that. Sure Favre had help. Hasn’t all Super Bowl winning quarterbacks had help? At least with Favre, he has played consistently throughout his career. Where there are TD’s, there are sure to be INT’s. When you can be counted on to play game in and game out, no other quarterback has done it. Doesn’t that make a great quarterback? How about making your teammates believe that you are still in a game no matter what? Or how about making no-name receivers into pro bowl caliber players? How about being a guy who gets the whole team pumped up for a game? What is the true definition of the best quarterback of all time? People can argue who the greatest quarterback is of all time til they are blue in the face. The fact of the matter is, the style of play, the type of offense, the type of players, the weather environments, the position of the stars and the sun all will play a part in a players greatness. So you say Montana is the greatest. I say Favre is the greatest. I mean does it really truly matter who is the best quarterback?
by SeanInEauClaireWi on Aug 27, 2010 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Nope it doesn't matter
Its a media, and mental thing for most fans. What does naming the best qb help with this team? Nadda! So get back to Viking football, and screw the nay sayers and Favre hatters because 20 got dang years at qb is pretty great to me in itself!
Can you get ❼ Lebron? Can you get 1 Vikings? 2010 is the year to do it!!
by UnBannedVikingholic on Aug 27, 2010 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions
True I respect everyones opinion
I just know that had Favre never played for the Vikings and lets say he had the same success last year but in his 2nd season with the Jets, many Vikes fans that are calling him the GOAT wouldn’t be. I can put homerism aside for that debate and I wish others could also.
Favre: It's rare to ever see a QB be so indecisive, waffle...
It's also unlikely to have one start 19 consecutive seasons.
but see thats just it
because most Vikings fans never would put Favre in the same sentence of Montana and it is not meant to offend the intellect of Viking fans(Viking and football fans not casual fans). But once a teams fan base can truly see what Favre can do, people change their tune. Yes, homerism does play a big part in this. It is more popularity contest than people will admit. Had Favre played like this in a second year with them, you would then have a much larger market to sing the tunes of GOAT.
by SeanInEauClaireWi on Aug 27, 2010 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions
I got ya
There is no diffinitive answer to the best QB of all time. Yes it is opinion. For the NFL fans that watch pretty much only their team homerism would play a huge role. For the complete NFL fan that follows their team proudly, but follows the rest of the league extensively it would probably be easier to put homerism aside.
The only way to have an intelligent conversation regarding the best QB of all time, is to do so without bias(homerism).
Favre: It's rare to ever see a QB be so indecisive, waffle...
It's also unlikely to have one start 19 consecutive seasons.
Steve Young was better than Favre too.
Favre’s a unique NFL player based on his longevity, toughness and style of play, but he’s not in the top 5 QB’s of all time. Top 10 yes, top 5 no (Montana, Marino, Elway, Young, Unitas were all better in my opinion, and I think Manning and/or Brady knock him down farther depending on how the remainder of his career pans out.). By the end of Manning’s career I don’t think there will be much of an argument regarding who was better.
But Favre’s got the all on sheer entertainment value and he’ll be in the top 5 conversation forever.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 27, 2010 7:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Just my opinion.
I’m sure no one would believe this now, but back in the mid-90’s I said that given the choice between Young and Favre at their peak, I’d take Young. Still would.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 27, 2010 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Interesting. Why?
I would take Favre, even back then I thought Favre was better. Why Young? Genuinely interested to hear why.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Yeah that does seem like a weird comment. Especially from the guy who’s always said it was obvious choice between rodgers and Favre, because Rodgers had more years left in him.
To say you’d still take Young even in hindisght is to say the opposite, you’d take the guy who you know only has a couple years left in him, instead of the guy who’ll still be tossed around in MVP talk a decade from now, and will only have a losing record one time for you. Huh.
"... especially from the guy who's always said ti was the obvious choice between Rodgers and Favre because Rodgers had more years left in him..."
Which is why I qualified it with “at their peak”. Maybe I could have phrased it better. My point was that if age wasn’t a consideration (which it clearly was), I’d have taken Young over Favre. But of course when Favre started to blossom Young was nearing the end of his career, and if you’re picking based on the reality of their relative positions in 1995, the obvious choice was Favre.
As has been pointed out above, this is almost a purely subjective question. I’d pick Young over Favre based on his relative athleticism, his left-handedness (which created more problems for defenses than it was given credit for) and his interception/TD ratio. There were throws that Favre made that Young probably couldn’t have, but in most cases Young wouldn’t have tried. He was smarter than Favre, in my opinion, and thus a better QB, in my opinion.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 27, 2010 11:33 PM CDT up reply actions
And trust me...
… the Packers fans I said this to back then thought I was nuts too.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 27, 2010 11:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Actually...
… the more I think about this, the more I think that I’m wrong. Or at least answering the wrong question between Young and Favre.
At the peak of their powers with both healthy, if my team had to win a game tomorrow, I’d take Young over Favre. I think Young’s best years were better than Favre’s best years (1996 and 2009). But because of Favre’s relative longevity and success later in his career, I probably have to give him the nod as having the better career.
Does that make more sense?
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 28, 2010 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions
I find this comment stunning
At the peak of their powers with both healthy, if my team had to win a game tomorrow, I’d take Young over Favre
I don’t meant to imply you’re insane for thinking that (but you ARE a Packers fan, so I’m not sure :)) but Favre has more 4th quarter comebacks than anyone, save for maybe Elway. Yes, the latter part of his career he’s been known for soul crushing interceptions in NFC Championship games, but in his prime there was no one I feared in the last two minutes of a game to snatch a victory from defeat than Favre. And he still has that ability, as he did it several times last season.
Young, obviously, is a Hall of Famer, but save for the one Super Bowl season (and that last second Wildcard win over you guys in 1998, I think it was) I always thought Young was kind of over rated, to be honest.
Maybe I am suffering from selective memory, but I don’t remember Youg as a clutch, comeback kind of QB.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Favre in his prime (which is hard to define after last year)...
… also had multiple interception games in do or die situations. In 1996 (95 season) he threw 2 picks in the NFC championship game against Dallas. He threw 2 picks against Tampa in the 1998 playoffs, and 2 picks against the Niners in the 99 playoffs. and of course the 6 pick game against the Rams in the 2002 playoffs, and 2 more (at home, in the snow) against the Falcons in the 03 playoffs.
Defining his prime is difficult, but I think it’s fair to leave out 92-94 when he was still getting his legs. I would have put the end of his “prime” at roughly 2004 if not for last year. If you continue beyond 03, there is of course his 2 pick games in the NFC championship games in 08 and ’10.
Doesn’t mean he’s not a great QB. But I said “one game” not “one drive”. There was a time when I would have taken Favre over Young if my team had to win a game on a last minute drive, but I haven’t even felt that way in probably 10 years, and I think Young was less likely to leave his team in a position where that last drive was even necessary.
BTW, Young had 14 Game winning drives, including 5 in 92 and 4 in 98. Not nearly as many as Favre, but not bad in a much shorter career.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 28, 2010 3:00 PM CDT up reply actions
Defining his prime is difficult, but I think it’s fair to leave out 92-94 when he was still getting his legs. I would have put the end of his "prime" at roughly 2004 if not for last year.
Are you saying he didn’t playing well he last year in Green Bay?
Precisely how many & which Young seasons were better than Favre’s 2007, which you seem to be saying isn’t even one of his good ones?
It's pointless for me to argue about Favre with you.
We don’t agree and we’re never going to. He had a great 10 weeks in 2007, and then he faded. If you want to call that a great year, go ahead. The same thing happened in New York. I’m sure you disagree. I’m not trying to convince you otherwise. It’s just what I think.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 28, 2010 10:24 PM CDT up reply actions
p.s. just remember though it was me who tried to stick to talking purely about the subject here, and only you reverted to the “I can’t have a conversation with you” angle.
I was trying. But I can’t make you try.
No, you can't make me try...
I just don’t see any point in continuing to butt heads on Favre. I’ve been trying to lay off the Favre issues when I pop in over here. I failed that here and I knew, once I gave into temptation that an argument was inevitable. And I didn’t say “I can’t have a conversation with you”, I said that our conversations on Favre are generally pointless since we’re both pretty entrenched in our positions. Didn’t mean to imply that I was refusing to talk to you because I thought you were arguing inappropriately, I just don’t want to fight with you anymore.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 29, 2010 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions
OK
I guess I just had felt uncomfortable because I’d been not commenting on any of your replies to my posts here for a couple months, after our last go around. I was starting to feel a little weird in seeming to ignore you, because your replies usually making pretty good points. But as I found yet again, somehow whenever I do reply to you, you transform a perfectly reasonable disagreement on POV (it’s a message board dude, that’s what its for) into a “fight,” thereby making it personal and burying your original (interesting, valid) points. I don’t get it.
So let me leave it at that. You seem like a smart and nice guy, and I get a lot from reading your comments. But yes it’s probably best I go back to doing that passively. Please take away that when I return to not replying to your replies to my posts, it’s not that I don’t find your initial replies worth commenting on, it’s because I just don’t have the stomach anymore for what often happens next. Peace.
Thanks for the compliments.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 30, 2010 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Fair points
We’ll agree to disagree on this one, but I can see where you’re coming from. I guess I default to Favre for both performance and longevity, and Steve Young had the USFL and then the bench behind Montana for so many years.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Yeah.
I’ve always wondered what kind of career numbers Young would have put up if he 1)would have started his career in the NFL, perhaps accelerating the apprenticeship he later suffered through in Tampa; and 2)if he’d have gotten on the field sooner in in San Fran.
Maybe it wouldn’t have been any better. He certainly struggled in Tampa.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 28, 2010 10:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh yeah, forgot about his beginnings in Tampa
I’m sure he would, too.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Yeah
I’ve always wondered what kind of career numbers Favre would have put up if he 1)would have started his career in San Fran with 70 degree weather with a 2 mph wind. 2) If he had an owner like wilf who would be willing to surround him with enough talent to win a super bowl.
Yeah, because no one surrounded Favre with Superbowl talent in GB...
… oh wait.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 29, 2010 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions
2mph wind?
Are you old enough to remember Candlestick Park? I’m not sure the wind ever dropped down to 2mph there, and even if it did, it was still changing directions every 30 seconds…
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 29, 2010 8:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Considering that....
The stadium is currently named candlestick park, then yes, I am old enough to remember. (I just turned 1)
Sorry, maybe 8 mph would have been more appropriate lol. You know what my point was, and you know what other stadium with less favorable weather conditions I was comparing and contrasting with.
Yeah they surrounded some talent around him in the mid 90’s, but I’m not talking about that time period. And you knew that too.
I don't think many QB's think of the Stick as a nice place to play...
… weather wise. Is there snow? No. But who cares? I think the whole issue is a red herring.
Actually I didn’t know you were talking about a specific part of Favre’s time in GB, but since you brought it up… the 2009 Vikings were an example of Wilf’s willingness to surround Favre with enough talent to win a Superbowl, but the 2007 Packers weren’t an example of GB’s willingness to do so? Didn’t they both lose in the NFC Championship game? (In part, on both occasions, due to late picks from Favre himself…)
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 30, 2010 12:12 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah it is an odd POV. The only season that Young had that I think you could put above Favre’s 4-5 best seasons was 1994 … and even that one was uneven, he started off badly and was actually pulled in the middle of a series after they went down like 30-40 points (whereupon he famously started screaming at Siefert, on camera)
And outside that season, he really only had one other notable season. Only one even close to Favre’s top half dozen.
And the other POV approach, looking at “peak of powers”? Well then the best QB of all time is obvious to me. Kurt Warner, v.1999 End. Of. Discussion.
Actually, that would probably be Brady in his TD record year...
… but as I’ve since acknowledged, picking a guy for one game at the peak of his powers isn’t the same thing as picking a top 5 or 10 QB’s of all time. My fault for confusing those two questions. I’m sorry that my opinion differs from yours. I’ll just move on now since the productive/fun portion of this thread appears to be over. Talk to you later.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 28, 2010 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions
p.s. Young had that scrambling ability. I wouldn’t think TSSC would value that so much, but maybe that’s it. And maybe he doesn’t care that much that Young missed time for injury nearly every season he played. You can maybe ignore tha in the equation of “who is better,” but you can’t in the debate of who you want on your team, in the real world.
True.
But the question of the top 5 or 10 QB’s of all time presumes (at least to me) health and relative age are factored out, at least once the player has met the (admittedly subjective) standard to qualify for the discussion.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 27, 2010 11:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Wouldn't say Young was better at all
And the Manning thing we’ll have to wait and see. Right now, I think Favre’s gonna have him beat, if only by the sheer longevity of Favre’s career. Brady has kind of fallen behind. He was on his way to possibly getting into the top 5 equation, but that missed year sort of hurt him in that regard.
What was in that red pill?
Nice movie reference Ted. And Great article.
I like your premise that the Vikings have depth at WR and a QB that doesn’t need the same WR suspects year in and year out. The Vikings can only keep 5 WR on the roster. Berrian, Harvin, Camarillo, Mitchell, Walker, Payne, Biddle,and Small all are fighting for those spots. And by the way. Darius Reynaud has already spent one year catching passes from Brett. And he runs the same routes as Harvin. So there are plenty of guys who have a week left to show that they have NFL talent. And if none of the new guys can show talent then I’m sure the waiver wire will be watched pretty carefully.
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?"
Joe Kapp
As always... I don't envy the choices the Vikings have to make between talent and talent
What makes it harder is that they have to keep a spot for Rice, knowing that someone will have to go, and they have to cover Harvin at the same time. I still hope they dump Lewis though.
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
Receiving
Hope you’re right, but I’m not feeling it. Camarillo was held out of practice in Miami, reportedly because of an aggravated groin issue. If they knew they were going to trade him, that would be a preferable explanation. But now reports are surfacing that Camarillo was surprised by trade. If true, he becomes a dicier move – we need help NOW and a guy with a nagging injury who doesn’t know the playbook seems like more of a down the road solution, if a solution at all. But I hope he turns into Chris Carter and choose to believe he will!
Ahem
I can’t believe I have to be the one to say this, but: Yes It Does Matter. I’m sorry, I can drink the purple kool-aid, but even I only have so-much stomach for the Favre koolaid.
I’m not saying that the passing offense will not be “fine.” And I am not saying that others won’t emerge, etc. Of course, that happens every year on almost every team, and yes, Favre has always been very, very, very good (the best?) at spreading the ball around and finding & developing chemistry with new connections (one of the few things he may not be given enough credit for by his fans, even though I bet statistics bear it out). And in fact I think it very likely that Bernard gets back on track this year, and ends up having better numbers than any WR on that 96 SB team.
But I am saying that the road to the Superbowl was already steeper this year than last, even when we thought we were coming out of the gate with Percy and Sydney, and it’s getting downright daunting now. Our first 7 weeks are brutal, except for the bye or course (but on the other hand having it so early will make the second half of the season harder). Sydney I think can probably play no earlier than week 8, right? Frankly, I will be ecstatic if we even have a winning record still when he comes back. I will probably even be somewhat content with a 3-3 record. We have away games with Saints, Cowboys, and Packers in that stretch, and home game against Jets and Phins. 2-3 in those games is hardly inconceivable. If we do better and are 4-2 going into week 8, like I said I’m probably actually happy. But does even that put us on the inside track to the superbowl, like the 96 Packers were (6-1 going into week 8)? Heck no. especially if one of those losses come at Lambeau (very probable).
p.s. I’m probably a bit more familiar with that 96 team than you. You are completely ignoring the devastating combos at tight end of Keith Jackson and Mark Chmura (Packers ran a LOT of plays with two tight end formations that year), and the excellent passcatching skills/change of pace out of the backfield of Edgar Bennett & Dorsey Levens, which many think were the real keys to the offense — and personnel for which we have nothing comparable. And there was a returner named Desmond Howard who won the SB MVP, many think the Packers could have lost the game without him (a small, but real chance).
Excellent points
But I don’t think Ted was saying it will be easier to win the superbowl with Camarillo than Rice. He was saying that our WR corp will not be the issue. Farve will make his passes because Farve makes his receivers better than they were without him.
The schedule is the schedule. It will be a difficult year. We simply have to take care of winning our division first. That will not be easy. Anything better like a play-off bye week or Home Field advantage is just gravy.
You are not saying anything that isn’t true Puddn. But this team will need to believe in themselves to win. We have 21 out of 22 starters returning. A healthy and better performing O-Line can make a much stronger difference than the loss of one WR.
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?"
Joe Kapp
by lifelongvike on Aug 27, 2010 8:22 AM CDT up reply actions
The truth is...
Your expectations and level of concern pertaining to our record at various points in the season are probably not significantly more pessimistic than if Rice and Harvin were 100% from day one. Nothing is ever guaranteed in this league (sorry R4F), and you just never know when things will gel or when we’ll back in to a game and stink it up (Charlotte and Chicago last year come to mind).
There are certainly valid concerns, but Ted is spot-on about the receivers. Despite Rice and Harvin, this team has the talent to get the job done.
Maybe you missed the part where I said
The injury to Rice is a serious one, and it will affect the Vikings.
But I am saying it’s not the end of the world. The road to the Super bowl is always difficult, but the Vikings still have one of the best chances to get there. I have every confidence that the passing game will still be good and effective, and produce close to the level of last season.
And I purposely excluded tight ends and focused on WR’s, because this was about WR’s picking up the slack in the event of an injury. I like who the Vikes put out there at TE, and I’ll put Shank up against any of the GB TE’s.
And if we’re still comparing the Vikes to the ‘96 Packer team, defenses are a wash and I’d take AP over Dorsey Levens 9 days a week and thrice on Sunday.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Come on boys watch and learn favre will show everyone why he is the greatest come saterday he’s going to start molding are WR core in that game I say he steps it up on sat to shut up his neigh Sayers up! And with AP you know he feels the pressure I think he’s going to have a monster year and that will take the pressure of favre so in return favre will have a solid year . We have nothing to worry about are D is stout there down right scary! This game on sat should show some good signs of how good we can be SKOL VIKES!!!
by cali viking on Aug 27, 2010 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
Didn’t miss it. I guess I just chose to take the blue pill :) Please let me be clear, I like your posts, in fact I probably like yours the most of all DN official contributors. But I hope I can disagree with you respectfully, and constructively. Sure what you wrote can happen. But what if someone asked you to put your money where your mouth is. Would you do it? I’m guessing from the pil & Alice in WOnderland references, maybe not :)
Shank up against any of the GB TE’s
Fair enough (even though I’d still take Keith Jackson v.1996 over Shiancoe v.2009). But my point was having two top TEs on the field at the same time was what helped make that offense often unstoppable, it was a matchup nightmare for a lot of teams, just like Moss+Carter was here a decade ago.
I’d take AP over Dorsey Levens 9 days a week and thrice on Sunday.Again I was talking about the package of Levens+Bennett, and furthermore their role in the passing game. I was sticking to your original scope of discussion. I wasn’t even attempting to compare their running skills. Of course AD wins that comparison.
But if you want to say AD is more of a threat in the passing game than DL was, then heck yes I’ll take you on there, with no hesitation. Dorsey Levens had over 100 yard receiving in many of the games he played in. Including the NFC championship. That ability what made him a premier West Coast back, even if he was definitely not a top-flight pure running back.
Taking the blue pill is fine :)
Nothing wrong with disagreement at all. If I came across as angry, my apologies. You have a perfectly valid reason to feel the way you do and be dubious of my opinion.
Of course I’d like to have Rice healthy, and if I had a choice, I’d field Rice, Harvin, and Berrian. But that’s not an option right now, and I’ll take what we have, and I think the passing game will be okay.
As for the package of Levens and Bennett over Peterson and whoever, I’d honestly take Peterson and whoever, because Peterson’s abilities as a pass catcher has really developed, and I think someone will emerge from the scrum for backup that will be okay.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
OK we’re cool. I hope you’re right about Peterson coming along in the passing game. I mean … I kow he’s come along from where he started, for sure, but he started at a pretty low level. I hope he’s come along enough that he can at least be even measured in the same ballpark as someone like a Levens, or, yeah, a Chester Taylor. And his blocking too.
I think Peterson's always been able to be a good reciever
out of the backfield. The problem was we just never got a chance to see it, because he was always coming off the field on 3rd downs because he has trouble with his blocking.
Remember AP's first TD in the NFL?
Favre: It's rare to ever see a QB be so indecisive, waffle...
It's also unlikely to have one start 19 consecutive seasons.
Yeah, against San Diego I think
one handed juggling catch from a swing pass by TJ out of the backfield. Went untouched down the sideline to the tune of 60-some yards.
It was sweet.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Shame on you! Wasn’t it against the Falcons?
by packallday555 on Aug 28, 2010 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Damn you for making me look it up!
And yes, it was the Falcons.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Which TEs?
Both Jackson and Chmura were superior (in 96) to Shiancoe, though I’ll cede the point in the years that followed.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Aug 27, 2010 7:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Maybe
BF will raise the tallent of the WR corps. With AP`s help pluss the TE playing two deep helping block (OL) for BF and AP. The result being good and effective WCO ??.. Most importent is AP catching the ball frome the backfeild . I hope Harvin will be ok but any head trauma could be very bad long term.. Bottom line is the OL must win so BF will play within chilli`s offence? NET result is more gunslinger and who is better than brett !!!!. TE i like shank + BF , but finley is a beast …and arrogant. Allso if we compare the defenses of the 09 vikes to the 96 gb team it looks like wash except fore total points allowed 13+ vs 19+ and the vikes 09 vs gb 09 D .. Is moot who won the NFC NORTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
INT's
While it’s true that less than superstar receivers put up numbers with Favre, I think you should put up Favre’s numbers as well. I think as the talent level went down, the INT total went up because he had to force more throws to the lesser talented receivers.
Who makes Who
You can say Favre made all those recievers in the past. You’d probably be right. But lets not forget why Favre had the best year of his career last year. His name is Adrian (purple jesus) Peterson. Thats the defiant point. He played 17 years with only a serviceable running game or a running back threat. He comes to Minnesota with arguably the greatest running threat and has his best year at age 40. All I can say is as long as Peterson is healthy then Favre will continue to see 8 men in the box and having open recievers all over the field.
Thats what we do.
SKOL
Indeed, what hopes I have, AD (and the D) is what I hang my hat on
Last year was an aberration for the Vikings. I think we all know it. This was supposed to be AD’s offense, Favre was just supposed to be there to keep defenses honest. But things took an unexpected turn, Favre+Sydney+Percy+Chester made the passing game hot, and because people kept stubbornly trying to make AD beat them even after it was clear they were hot, we kicked some butt. The NFC Championship may have even been the first game during the season that clearly focused on Favre instead of AD. There’s another thread going on here right which talks about how much AD is or is not responsible for that loss. The talk there seems to be focusing on his ball handling issues in that game, but I would look at it another way, if there was a failing by AD ini that game, it was a sin of omission: We won most of the rest of our games because the other D focused on shutting down AD, and Favre made them pay for it. Against the Saints, their D clearly focused on shutting down Favre. AD should have made them pay more for it.
This year will probably be different, in the sense that it will NOT be different like last year was. It will be AD’s offense again. Lightning will probably not strike twice, the passing game will probably not be what it was last year (what a bizarre irony it is that, of the 4 players key to the passing game that I mentioned above, that we find ourselves in the preseason with only Favre (!!!) that we’re sure of having!) Teams will keep focusing on AD, but this time .. he (and o line, and D) may really have to beat them, we may not have as potent an air game to fall back on, especially in the toughest stretch, the early games.
The two key games are going to be (surprise surprise!) the Packers. Again. Last year IMO, Favre was the difference maker in both those games, moreso than in any other games that year, except maybe Dallas (he was key against Ravens too, but no more than AD was, it was a joint effort). But this year … I think if we want to beat them again, it will have to be the D that steps up, supported just enough by Adrian and Favre and Co. Jared and Ray and Antoine and Cook and EJ and all the rest will have to be the difference makers.
Peterson did make them pay for it in the NFC CG
but he made us pay for feeding him the ball as much as we did too. Otherwise, he had a real good game, positive statline wise.
Uh, AC/DC?
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Marquis Hamilton, and Marko Mitchell
will both have breakout games vs the Seahawks. Hamilton for sure
We just need a "muscle" WR like Rice
Rice would go up and battle for the ball, and while Berrian is my fav. WR…he can’t do that because he’s just not big enough. I don’t know about the rest of our receivers, but we just need a guy that can go up and fight for the ball 1-on-1 and we’ll be fine.
I think we’ll be good even with the loss of Sid, but it just makes each game a little more interesting.
I'm still a Minnesotan at heart...
Marko Mitchell is certainly not without muscles, and is as tall as Sid. The question is whether he can learn the routes well enough in the time left available.
all he needs to learn is run baby run and get ready to jump
dont forget that Favre, like I am sure other quarterbacks do, will tell another receiver to look for the sign to just go long and forget about the original route. All Mitchell would need to do is run and catch. Favre and Driver were always known for changing his route and having him run the slant. As long as Favre can trust him, Marko will get his chance.
by SeanInEauClaireWi on Aug 27, 2010 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Bravo!
Nice Job Mr Glover. Very good post.
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson
by RileysCannibalJct on Aug 27, 2010 7:16 PM CDT reply actions
The WR set isn't going to be the deciding factor
The offensive line will be.
And I’m going to really pissed at Chilly if the O-line stinks up the joint this year.
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
by DCPurple on Aug 27, 2010 7:25 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
+1
Solid takeaway
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
The only thing the Saints had better than the Vikes
Was the O-line. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think the Vikes had one sack on Brees in the NFCCG after leading the league. Heck did Brees even hit the turf once in that game?
If Sully’s calf is better, he and Loadholt should be a year better. If Sully can’t go it seems like Herrera is a better replacement than anyone at center. Who would fill in at RG?
Favre: It's rare to ever see a QB be so indecisive, waffle...
It's also unlikely to have one start 19 consecutive seasons.
The Vikes sacked Brees once
They had erratic pressure on him, but not consistent.
"Whoever said that the pen is mightier than the sword never encountered automatic weapons."
Thanks I wasent 100%
Brees gets rid of the ball quick, but when he needed it the line gave him time for the most part. The Saints O-line is pretty darn good… pricks.
Favre: It's rare to ever see a QB be so indecisive, waffle...
It's also unlikely to have one start 19 consecutive seasons.
Sidney out for 8 games, and how many for Harvin?
It’s not just the loss of Sidney Rice for half the season. We can’t count on Harvin to be a starter every week, either. After that, we have a guy with the dropsies and another who struggles to get open.
What I gathered from those stats you listed was that Favre’s GB teams often had 2 1,000-yd receivers, a sign that the DBs didn’t always know who to cover. Isn’t that far more clear between Berrian and Camarillo or Harvin and Berrian? I would think so.
Still think he's not a big loss
now that they’re 0-2? their pass game without Rice looks like the worst in the NFL right now.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
